Hot Topics:

Political advocacy should always be transparent (Editorial)

Updated:
05/24/2013 10:11:43 PM EDT

It turns out that concern about funding transparency in political advocacy isn't limited to IRS scrutiny of tea party groups looking to use a federal tax exemption that can obscure the identities of their donors.

State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, chairman of the House State Government Committee, plans a June 5 committee hearing to probe a group that recently aired a TV ad critical of Corbett.

Metcalfe told The Associated Press this week that Pennsylvanians for Accountability "appear to be a political committee more than anything else." He reportedly wants the group to register as a state political committee, which would require disclosure of its financial details.

A Pennsylvanians for Accountability lawyer, Adam Bonin, told AP that the group plans to apply soon for a tax exemption for "social welfare" advocacy under section 501(c)4 of the U.S. tax code, the very same exemption sought by the tea party groups targeted for heightened review by the IRS.

The federal tax code allows groups with 501(c)4 exemptions to influence political campaigns without identifying their donors as long as "social welfare" remains their primary mission.

Advertisement

Of course, the meaning of "social welfare" can also be stretched in lots of ways.

Is it a matter of social welfare to criticize Corbett's policies ahead of his presumed re-election campaign? Is it a matter of social welfare for tea partiers to advocate against policies of the Obama administration?

Seems to us that social welfare connotates efforts to improve quality of life in local communities, particularly when it comes to our most medically, socially and financially vulnerable neighbors. In such context, using a tax exemption intended to enable such efforts as a partisan political weapon consititutes an abuse of the tax code.

Which might just be the reason that authorities - the IRS, and now Metcalfe and his committee - think these groups deserve an extra layer of scrutiny.

In short, the 501(c)4 exemption - which emerged in the wake of the 2010 Citizens United ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court - has clearly become a bipartisan problem, a tax code loophole to hide the sources of funding that drives political messaging.

We believe that all political advocacy should be transparent, regardless of ideology.

- Matthew Major, opinion editor, can be reached at mmajor@publicopinionnews.com, or follow him on Twitter @MattMajorPO.